- Thune: Downed fighter jets show more evidence of separatist capabilities
- Obama tells DNC fundraising crowd: ‘I’m not overly partisan’
- Chambliss: Downed jet ultimately goes back to Putin
- Perdue strategy: Run against Reid, Obama, Pelosi
- White House: More changes to contraception mandate coming
- ‘Operation Normandy’ set to send 3,500 volunteers to border to ‘stop an invasion’
- Netanyahu’s spokesman: Safe to fly to Israel
- Oregon vandals smear cars with doughnuts, pastries, chocolate bars
- Obama’s ‘Katrina moment’ leaves his favorability factor at 42 percent
- Feds tout nearly 200 arrests, $625K in seized cash in Texas border crackdown
UK newspapers steer clear of naked Harry photos
Question of the Day
Neil Wallis, a former News of the World executive editor, said fallout from the hacking scandal had left newspapers “terrified of their own shadow.”
“In this post-Leveson era … they daren’t do things that most of the country, if they saw it in the newspaper, would think `that’s a bit of a laugh,’” Wallis told the BBC.
While newspapers including The Sun and the Daily Mirror proclaimed that the naked photos had been “banned,” that is not strictly true.
Several media organizations around the world ran the two naked photos of the prince, which are being sold, according to British media reports, for about 10,000 pounds ($16,000).
British outlets refrained, after receiving a warning Wednesday from palace officials.
Prince Harry’s office confirmed it had contacted the Press Complaints Commission, an industry watchdog, which in turn advised newspapers not to publish the pictures.
Any paper that ran them risks being chastised by the commission, which can demand a newspaper publish an apology, but has no power to issue fines.
They could also potentially be open to an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit from the prince.
A letter to the watchdog from royal law firm Harbottle and Lewis warned that royal officials “entirely reserve their rights as to any future steps that they may take should publication take place.”
Once, editors might have risked it, arguing that publishing the images was in the public interest because Harry is a public _ and publicly funded _ figure.
Satchwell acknowledged there was a risk Leveson’s inquiry could chill press freedom. But he said newspapers were simply behaving responsibly over Harry.
“Of course freedom of the press is vitally, vitally important,” he said. “But just because you can publish something doesn’t mean that you should.”
Jill Lawless can be reached at http://Twitter.com/JillLawless
TWT Video Picks
Retailer pays a price for getting too close to Obama
- CARSON: Costco and the perils of mixing politics and business
- Two Ukrainian fighter jets shot down
- David Perdue defeats Jack Kingston in Georgia Republican Senate primary runoff
- HURT: The cost of 'free' water in Detroit
- Beretta moving to Tennessee over Maryland gun laws
- Obama orders Pentagon advisers to Ukraine
- IRS seeks help destroying another 3,200 computer hard drives
- D.C. appeals panel deals big blow to Obamacare subsidies
- DEACE: How to go from civil rights icon to bigot in one quote
- House task force to recommend National Guard on border, faster deportations
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq